|
Ty Cobb/Bushing/SCDA/Game-Used Decal Bat
Posted By: <b>warshawlaw</b><p>As far as the excuses of SCDA go, excuse me while I shun your service. A judge who owns 100 shares of stock in IBM removes himself from trying a case about IBM because of the "appearance of impropriety." Remember that phrase, it is the key here. I don't want people who sell stuff to authenticate their own stuff because it looks fishy even if it is on the level. IMHO the opinion of an "expert" on his own item is always suspect, regardless of whether it is right or wrong ultimately. That's why we avoid situations that appear improper. Nothing may be amiss but that doubt is always there.
|
Ty Cobb/Bushing/SCDA/Game-Used Decal Bat
Posted By: <b>Aaron</b><p>Troy: <br /><br />You claim that H&B knew Bushing owned the bat (my assumption is you are claiming they knew he owned the bat BEFORE they bid on it, although you curiously didn't make that distinction). <br /><br />Yet, Marshall Fogel (one of the prominent collectors you mention in your post) is quoted (among others) in a New York Daily News article that H&B did not know. <br /><br />How can you prove H&B knew? (Right now it looks as though you are lying to cover up for an ugly scandal.)<br /><br />As regards the rest of your post, why not refuse to provide authentication services to auction houses that refuse to make public in an item description whether an item has been authenticated by one of your SCDA authenticators who also happens to own the item? <br /> <br /><br />
|
Ty Cobb/Bushing/SCDA/Game-Used Decal Bat
Posted By: <b>jay behrens</b><p>Aaron, it's ahrd for SCDA to do something like that since most items would have been authenticated prior to going to the auction house. It's pretty much out of their hands at point. <br /><br />You are correct though that pressure now needs to put on the auction houses to fully disclose things about the items they are offering. Between the Bushing scandal and the "stablization" of the Keeler, the auction houses need to do some house cleaning and "come clean", so to speak, about the items they are offering.<br /><br />Jay<br><br>Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty and well-preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming --- WOW, What a ride!
|
Ty Cobb/Bushing/SCDA/Game-Used Decal Bat
Posted By: <b>dennis</b><p>"The whole controversy, Fogel adds, would never have erupted if Bushing had not committed what he considers a serious ethical breach. It was widely known that Bushing had extensively researched the bat and gave it an A-10, his highest mark.<br /><br /><br />But he didn't tell people he was the seller - and had every reason to pump it up (Hillerich & Bradsby didn't know Bushing was the seller until contacted by a Daily News reporter weeks after the sale." looks a little different than the post from scda
|
Ty Cobb/Bushing/SCDA/Game-Used Decal Bat
Posted By: <b>jay behrens</b><p>I just went back and reread Troy's intial post. Very cleverly worded. I'm sure a lot time was spent flshing out that post before it was made. <br /><br />He mentions the name of prominent collectors and how they talk to Bushing, but never says directly that Bushing ever told them or H&B that he was the owner of the bat or any other item they may have been interested in. He is honest when he says "Since it was his item, he was more than willing to discuss it and try to promote the item to achieve the highest price possible." Which also means he never disclosed the fact that he was owner unless asked that question. Ryan even states this in his post.<br /><br />When I first read that post, I thought, wow, something good is coming about. To a degree it is. But after having reread his post, I realize it's just more selfserving spin and damage control. The perfect example is his statement "we were just operating within standard practices of the industry". What about holding yourself to a higher standard when it's obvious that standard practice is less than ethical?<br /><br />Let's hope these changes are real and that SCDA will start holding Mr Bushing and others to higher standard. I'm not gonna hold my breath since there is way too much money to lost by doing this.<br /><br />Jay <br><br>Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty and well-preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming --- WOW, What a ride!
|
Ty Cobb/Bushing/SCDA/Game-Used Decal Bat
Posted By: <b>Troy R. Kinunen</b><p>This email was sent by Marshall Fogell to Michael O'Keefe. It was also forwarded to Dave Bushing. <br /><br />SCDA has held itself to higher standards. We were the first authentication company to adopt these policies. My words were carefully worded because I was not present when Dave spoke about the bat. I was not spinning my response, I was being accurate. My home number is 414-828-9990. I would like to discuss this personally with each and every individual that has an issue with this matter. <br /> <br /><br /><br />SUBJECT SLUGGING IT OUT ARTICLE<br /><br /> <br /><br />DEAR MICHAEL<br /><br /> <br /><br />WE HAVE KNOWN EACH OTHER AS FAR BACK AS THE DAYS YOU WORKED FOR THE ROCKY MOUNTAIN NEWS.<br /><br />OUR ASSOCIATION IS WHY I FEEL COMFORTABLE IN EXPANDING MY VIEW OF DAVE (BUSHING). <br /><br /> <br /><br />I KNOW YOU WELL ENOUGH THAT YOU WOULD APPRECIATE MY COMMENTS AS I HAVE NEVER BEEN A QUIET PERSON IF I FEEL THAT THE PUBLIC IS ENTITLED TO KNOW THE “NEGATIVE OR POSITIVE”<br /><br /> <br /><br />WITH THESE COMMENTS AS BACKROUND, I DID NOT WISH TO CREATE ANY IMPRESSION THAT DAVE COMMITTED A SERIOUS ETHICAL BREACH AND THAT DAVE ABUSED HIS INFLUENCE. <br /><br /> <br /><br />MICHAEL, I HAVE KNOWN DAVE FOR OVER TEN YEARS. WE COAUTHORED A “BAT” BOOK TOGETHER. WE PIONEERED HOW TO DATE AND AUTHENTICATE PROFESSIONAL BASEBALL BATS. DAVE SOLD ME BATS AND HELPED ME BUILD WHAT IS UNIVERSALLY ACKNOWLEDGED AS THE BEST BAT COLLECTION KNOWN---INCLUDING THE HALL OF FAME.<br /><br /> <br /><br />DAVE IS, AS YOU KNOW, AN ACCEPTED NATIONALLY KNOWN AUTHENTICATOR AND I MUST SAY HE DESERVES THIS POSITIVE RECOGNITION.<br /><br /> <br /><br />I HAVE NEVER COME CLOSE TO ANY CONCLUSION THAT DAVE COMMITTED AND ETHICAL BREACH OR ABUSED HIS INFLUENCE. I HAVE WITHOUT QUESTION IN THE PAST AND PRESENTLY ON OCCASION HAVE DISAGREED PROFESSIONALLY WITH DAVE ON ISSUES AS TO THE SUBJECT OF BASEBALL BATS. THESE DISAGREEMENTS WILL PROBABLY NOT BE COMPLETELY RESOLVED AS OUR OPINIONS THOUGH OPPOSITE ARE SUPPORTED BY EVIDENCE. WE ALL RECOGNIZE THAT WE ARE RECONSTRUCTING HISTORY WHEN WE WEREN’T THERE TO SEE IT HAPPEN. WITH THIS SAID, AND MY INTIMATE KNOWLEDGE OF ALL THERE IS TO KNOW ABOUT DAVE, I WITHOUT HESITATION ABLE TO STATE TO YOU MICHAEL THAT I HAVE NOW NOR EVER HAD ANY EVIDENCE THAT DAVE BUSHING COMMITTED A SERIOUS EHTICAL BREACH OR ABUSED HIS INFLUENCE.<br /><br /> <br /><br />AS TO THE DIMAGGIO BAT AND THE ISSUE OF DAVE STATING HE OWNS AT BAT FOR SALE THAT HE HAS AUTHENTICATED. <br /><br /> <br /><br /> COLLECTING IS A GROWING AND EVOLVING COLLECTIBLE. I NEVER CONSIDERED THE NEED FOR A DEALER WHO AUTHENTICATES A BAT HE OWNS TO STATE SO IN AN AUCTION CATALOG.<br /><br />WHEN IT BECAME REASONABLE TO DO SO, IT IS CLEAR THAT DAVE HAD NO PROBLEM DOING SO. AS AN OBSERVATION, THIS SUBJECT HAS NEVER BEEN ADDRESSED IN THE OTHER COLLECTIBLES AREAS. I STAND BY MY STATEMENT THAT AUTHENTICATORS WHO OWN AN OBJECT FOR SALE IN AUCTION AND WHO WRITE AN LOA REGARDLESS OF THE OBJECT SHOULD REVEAL THEIR OWNSHIP INTEREST. I RESPECT DAVE WHO WILL BE ONE OF THE FIRST TO SET THIS STANDARD AT THE VERY TIME THE SUBJECT BECAME AN ISSUE. DAVE’S PAST PRACTICES WERE IN KEEPING WITH THE INDUSTRY STANDARDS FOR ITS TIME. I ALSO STAND BY MY THE FACT THAT DAVE DOES TRY TO DO THE RIGHT THING WHICH IS PROVEN BY THE FACT THE HIS TIMING AS TO THE OWNERSHIP INTEREST RESOULUTION IS APPROPRIATE.<br /><br /> <br /><br />THE DIMAGGIO BAT CONTROVERSY, I BELIEVE, STANDS ON ITS OWN “LEGS” AND SHOULD BE VOID OF ACCUSATIONS OF WRONGDOING. LOUISVILLE SLUGGER MADE THE DECISION TO RELY ON AN EYEWITNESS ACCOUNT, IN PART, AND THIS IS AN ACCEPTABLE INDUSTRY STANDARD. <br /><br /> <br /><br />MICHAEL, IN CONCLUSION, YOU SHOULD KNOW THAT ANY DEALER WILL TELL YOU THAT I HAVE SUED DEALERS IN THE PAST FOR WRONGDOING AND I HAVE THE REPUTATION FOR SPEAKING OUT WHEN I BELIEVE THERE IS PROVABLE BAD PRACTICES.<br /><br /> <br /><br />AS SUCH, DAVE BUSHING CREDIBLE OPINIONS AND UNDERSTANDABLE MISTAKES AND REASONABLE RESOLUTIONS SHOULD NOT BE SUBSTITUTED FOR UNDERSERVED ACCUSATIONS.<br /><br /> <br /><br />I KNOW THAT YOU ARE REPORTING ALL SIDES OF CONTROVERSIES WHETHER IT IS THIS SUBJECT OR ANOTHER AND THE PUBLIC HAS THE RIGHT TO KNOW AND DECIDE. PUBLIC CONTROVERSIES THROUGH THE PRESS CAN CERTAINLY LEAD TO IMPROVEMENT. IF I CAN BE A PART OF THIS IMPROVEMENT I WOULD WELCOME THE CHANCE AS I HAVE TRIED TO DO THROUGH OUR CONVERSATIONS. IN DOING SO, I KNOW YOU CARE ABOUT MY OPINONS AND I WANTED TO TAKE THIS OPPORTUNITY TO SHARE WITH YOU A DEEPER UNDERSTANDING OF MY VIEW OF THIS SUBJECT.<br /><br /> <br /><br />BEST REGARDS, <br /><br /> <br /><br />MARSHALL<br /><br /> <br /><br /> <br /><br /> <br /><br /> <br />
|
Ty Cobb/Bushing/SCDA/Game-Used Decal Bat
Posted By: <b>Scott Forrest</b><p>when you say to remember the key phrase "shade of impropriety". This is something that never enters the minds of sports memorabilia authenticators.
|
Ty Cobb/Bushing/SCDA/Game-Used Decal Bat
Posted By: <b>jay behrens</b><p>Interesting read. So the DiMaggio bat is authenticated based on an eyewitness. I'm assuming that this eyewitness is Heinrich, who would also have a vested interest in this being a streak bat since he is the one that sold it to Bushing. <br /><br />I'm sorry, but this reeks to high heaven and barely warrants being athenticated, let alone getting the highest grade possible. I would assume that getting this grade would involve irrefutable evidence.<br /><br />And falling back on "it was standard practice" is a lame excuse. It doesn't mean that it's right. It's like the old mining and steel barons making people live company towns. It may have been stardard practice, but that doesn't mean that company towns were a right or good thing. you should be cleaning up your act and removing any appearance of impropriety PRIOR to any scandal breaking out. <br /><br />You crow about no authenticator has sold an item that they authenticated since the policy was instituted. This obviously didn't happen too long ago, so bragging about this fact doesn't carry much weight. And I am sure Mr Bushing will just find a awy to disguise his interest an any items that come to sale in the future.<br /><br />Thanks for the changes you've made. Let's hope they have some impact.<br /><br />Jay<br /><br />Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty and well-preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming --- WOW, What a ride!
|
Ty Cobb/Bushing/SCDA/Game-Used Decal Bat
Posted By: <b>Dan Bretta</b><p>So Marshall Fogel is saying that the DiMaggio bat was given an A-10 on one eyewitness account of a 93 year old man who forgot he had the bat for 60 years, never mentioned that he had this bat ever, was known to use the exact same model bat as DiMaggio, and was even known to borrow bats from DiMaggio? Not to mention the ballmarks on the bat correspond to Henrich and not DiMaggio. <br /><br />Mastro claims that Henrich and DiMaggio were close friends, but Henrich is quoted as saying he never went out with DiMaggio once in the entire time they were teammates. <br /><br />IMO Fogel is coming to Bushing's aid because he has as much to lose as Bushing does. All of these authenticators and auction houses have much to lose if it becomes common knowledge that even an A-10 from the world's foremost authority really means "maybe".
|
Ty Cobb/Bushing/SCDA/Game-Used Decal Bat
Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>Troy, I'll say again what I said before: the conflict of interest by Bushing is such that had your industry had even the remotest amount of governmental oversight, you would be on the wrong end of an investigation. We know it, you know it. Bushing's ethical breach was so great--yet it was not only not disclosed to the bidding public but you have the balls to come in here and say that he disclosed it to anyone who employed a psychic detective and asked the right question. I'm just curious, Troy: at what stage in your life did the pursuit of money override your love of sports?
|
Ty Cobb/Bushing/SCDA/Game-Used Decal Bat
Posted By: <b>Troy R. Kinunen</b><p><br />Since members of this post are both passionate and suspicious regarding our methods of authentication for the Joe DiMaggio bat, all of us at SCDA are willing to offer the following:<br /><br />SCDA will pay travel, lodging and meals for up to 5 members of this post to meet with us in either Milwaukee or Chicago. At that time, we will provide you with the shipping records from Louisville that we inspected, video footage of Joe DiMaggio using bats with labels both up and down, still photos of Joe DiMaggio using bats with labels both up and down, a review of the video taped session with Tommy Henrich, and we will also explain the financial arrangements regarding ownership and payments recieved from the sale of this bat which affected our authenticators . All other related documents will be offered for viewing at this time. <br /><br />Also, if any members take me up on this offer, I will get sworn statements from all potential bidders as to at what point of the auction they were made aware of the fact that Dave Bushing owned the bat. I was not privy to these conversations, so if warranted, I will begin to get accurate records of the bidding procedure. I also extend this offer to Michael O'Keefe if interested. He has declined to meet with us in person upon two different invitations.<br /><br />For the record, this offer was extended to some of the original parties involved that questioned the authentication of the Joe DiMaggio bat. My one request was that the entire session be video taped. I am going to request the same for this offer also so all facts will be accureately represented and chronicled.<br /><br />The members of this board have been very critical of SCDA. Lets see if anyone is willing to really find out the facts about this bat. We are willing to provide them.
|
Ty Cobb/Bushing/SCDA/Game-Used Decal Bat
Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>Troy, you're on to us: we just want to bitch for bitching's sake.<br /><br />I nominate the most knowledgable two people on the board, Robert Plancich and his attorney. Oh, and me too (you can never have enough attorneys at these sort of things). <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>
|
Ty Cobb/Bushing/SCDA/Game-Used Decal Bat
Posted By: <b>Dan Bretta</b><p>Troy, I left a message with you in your voicemail. You can contact me by the phone number I left you or email me at nudan92@yahoo.com
|
Ty Cobb/Bushing/SCDA/Game-Used Decal Bat
Posted By: <b>Troy R. Kinunen</b><p>Dan Bretta has committed. There are 4 more spots available.
|
Ty Cobb/Bushing/SCDA/Game-Used Decal Bat
Posted By: <b>jay behrens</b><p>Troy, I just responded to your email. Count me in since I can easily make myself available.<br /><br />Jay<br><br>Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty and well-preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming --- WOW, What a ride!
|
Ty Cobb/Bushing/SCDA/Game-Used Decal Bat
Posted By: <b>Judge Dred</b><p>Save a seat for Robert Plancich. Maybe he'll take you up on it this time.
|
Ty Cobb/Bushing/SCDA/Game-Used Decal Bat
Posted By: <b>Troy R. Kinunen</b><p>jay has committed. 3 spots left.
|
Ty Cobb/Bushing/SCDA/Game-Used Decal Bat
Posted By: <b>Aaron</b><p>Troy: Thanks for posting Fogel's e-mail. Of course nowhere in it does Fogel retract his statement that H&B did not know beforehand that Bushing owned the bat, so you've essentially confirmed the following: <br /><br />1. H&B did not know the bat was owned by Bushing prior to purchasing the bat. <br /><br />2. Marshall Fogel believes that H&B did not know the bat was owned by Bushing prior to purchasing it. <br /><br />When you are able to offer proof that H&B knew beforehand that Bushing owned the bat, I'm sure the entire collecting community would be eager to see it. <br /><br />You also ignored my second question: If auction houses refuse to include information in an item description that the authenticator and owner of an item are the same person, that SCDA will no longer provide authentication services to such auction house. <br /><br />You want to get your credibility back? <br /><br />That's the way to do it. <br /><br />You want to keep getting money from auction houses without rocking the boat? <br /><br />Then keep on your present course and accept that the credibility of SCDA is forever tarnished and will continue to be the object of suspicion and derision for what most consider to be unethical practices. <br /><br />On the same note, you seem to be purposefully missing a couple points here: The major complaint (and source of suspicion of Bushing and SCDA's authentication methods) stems from your failure to disclose to potential bidders that Bushing owned the bat he himself had authenticated (and confirmation that thse types of consignments are commonplace and have been for years). <br /><br />And before you offer the "this information was available to anyone who asked answer," I would like to say that I, as a potential bidder, did not know Bushing owned the bat, and did not know that Bushing and/or SCDA owned any lot in any auction for the past four years that it provided authentication services for. <br /><br />I would imagine 99% of the posters on this site would share this position. <br /><br />Unfortunately, I'm not a "top collector" who was apparently aware that this practice was going on. I didn't even suspect that SCDA would tolerate such an obvious and blatant conflict of interest and breach of ethical standards and conceal vital information from its customers. <br /><br />Whether you want to acknowledge it or not, SCDA and Dave Bushing are guilty of deception by omission, by failing to make public an obvious conflict of interest that could severely question the validity of the authentication of the bat (and the motivation for such validity) and change a potentials bidders mind about bidding on an item he might otherwise have no reason to be suspicious of.<br /><br />I've purchased several items in major sports auctions over the past few years that were authenticated by Dave Bushing and/or SCDA. I am now suspicious about all of them (one jersey in particular). <br /><br />I would like to know that if I provide you with the auction and lot number, would you reveal if Bushing, SCDA or any of its authenticators was, in fact, the consignor as well?
|
Ty Cobb/Bushing/SCDA/Game-Used Decal Bat
Posted By: <b>Aaron</b><p>Agreed. Robert Planich should be on the trip. Since suing him obviously hasn't made the issues he raised (and revealed) go away, you should try dealing with him as a concerned collector, just as you seem to be offering collectors here. (You should also drop your lawsuit against him since it just makes you guys look more guilty by trying to silence a whistle-blower.) <br /><br />BTW, if you think flying five collectors out for a carefully arranged visit to "examine" your authentication process (great PR move!) is a better idea than to take a strong, ethical stand and stop allowing your authenticators to act as dealers and consignors, then you guys are in worse shape than you think. <br />
|
Ty Cobb/Bushing/SCDA/Game-Used Decal Bat
Posted By: <b>jay behrens</b><p>SCDA is not the one suing Robert. It is H&B. If you read Troy's post, SCDA no longer allows their authenticators sell items that they themselves have authenticated. I'm sure there are ways around that, but at least it's a start. Now if we could only get Mastro and the other auction houses to disclose when an item has been "stablized", restored, cleaned up, etc.<br /><br />I do agree that Robert should be one of the people on this trip since he is the one that brought this to light and is the one the that asked to see the evidence and documention that proves the bat is what it is claimed to be. If SCDA can convince him that the bat is as claimed, then his lawsuit will go away since he would have to come forward to say that the bat is as claimed.<br /><br />Jay<br /><br />Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty and well-preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming --- WOW, What a ride!
|
Ty Cobb/Bushing/SCDA/Game-Used Decal Bat
Posted By: <b>Aaron</b><p>Hey, Troy: <br /><br />In your post re: SCDA's ethical standards you wrote: <br /><br />"2. When an authenticator consigns an item to auction, on the back of each letter there is a check box. If an authenticator has any financial interest in that item, the box is checked. This discloses the fact that the authenticator owns the item. The bidder then has the option of 1. accepting that opinion 2. Getting a second opinion 3. Or passing on bidding if the bidder is not comfortable knowing the authenticator owned the item. If potential bidders are concerned about this, please ask the auction house to see the letter before bidding. <br /><br />3. Also disclosed on the back of the letter is a money back guarantee issued by the authenticator for items that they own. If the piece is sent for another expert opinion and it is found that information was wrong, omitted, or proven to be incorrect, the authenticator, not the auction house, will issue a full refund. Also, the cost of the authentication will be paid for by our authenticator." <br /><br />I have a couple SCDA LOA's for "game worn" jerseys I won in the August 2004 Mastro and Hunt auctions. Neither of them has a check box or a money back guarantee. (I went back to check to see if I'd been duped by you guys.)<br /><br />When exactly did your new ethics policy go into effect? <br />
|
Ty Cobb/Bushing/SCDA/Game-Used Decal Bat
Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>I would respectfully request that Robert Plancich and his attorney take the last two spots. He has the most at stake here. Agreed?
|
Ty Cobb/Bushing/SCDA/Game-Used Decal Bat
Posted By: <b>Aaron</b><p>Jay: <br /><br />You wrote: "If you read Troy's post, SCDA no longer allows their authenticators sell items that they themselves have authenticated." <br /><br />That's not what he wrote. <br /><br />He wrote that SCDA authenticators couldn't consign items with SCDA LOA's. Note that Dave Bushing or Dan Knoll (or Troy) could offer their own LOA and still consign an item they own.
|
Ty Cobb/Bushing/SCDA/Game-Used Decal Bat
Posted By: <b>jay behrens</b><p>I hope SCDA has them under contract so they cannot pull a stunt like that. It might also fall under a no compete clause if they have any contract at all. <br /><br />I'd love to hear what Troy has to say on this as I haven't given much thought to loopholes, but this is definately something to be concerned with on an ethical level and a competition level if they are allowed to issue their own independent LOAs while still working for SCDA.<br /><br />Jay<br><br>Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty and well-preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming --- WOW, What a ride!
|
Ty Cobb/Bushing/SCDA/Game-Used Decal Bat
Posted By: <b>Aaron</b><p>My last message of the night: <br /><br />Troy wrote: <br /><br />"The issue of disclosure has never been an issue to the collecting community up until the time of the Joe DiMaggio bat." <br /><br />This one was just too good to pass up. Troy, the reason it wasn't an issue is because the collecting community at large didn't know this was even going on! I certainly didn't know. Aren't I part of the collecting community? <br /><br />Come on. <br /><br />What you really should have written was: <br /><br />The issue of disclosure has never been an issue to the collecting community because it was a carefully guarded secret of which the vast majority of collectors were unaware of. <br /><br />That at least sounds more honest. <br /><br />Then you wrote: <br /><br />"Once it became an issue, we instituted that policy within 30 days of it being brought to our attention." <br /><br />ROTFL!!!! <br /><br />What you really should have written was: <br /><br />Once our secret was revealed and in became an issue, the public outrage forced us to take "action." Had the public not become aware, we would have continued to operate with the status quo.<br /><br />Hi-larious. Good night! <br />
|
Ty Cobb/Bushing/SCDA/Game-Used Decal Bat
Posted By: <b>Troy R. Kinunen</b><p>SCDA has taken the stance that our authenticators are still allowed to buy and sell. When selling, they can issue their own letter of authenticity. No letter from SCDA will be issued by our authenticators.
|
Ty Cobb/Bushing/SCDA/Game-Used Decal Bat
Posted By: <b>Aaron</b><p>Jay: You would think so, but it appears Troy (and his SCDA authenticators) came up with that specific language specifically so they could get around the ethics guidelines through that very loophole. Note that Troy does not say that SCDA authenticators may not sell items that they authenticated. <br /><br />So individually they can do it, just not via SCDA. <br /><br />Case in point, Dave Bushing is selling some game worn and used items on E-Bay right now ("DBushing1") where he offers his LOA. <br /><br />At least that's open about the conflict of interest, so I can accept that. It's the concealment that's concerning.
|
Ty Cobb/Bushing/SCDA/Game-Used Decal Bat
Posted By: <b>Troy R. Kinunen</b><p>Where are the loopholes? <br /><br />What is not being disclosed?<br /><br /><br />If Dave Bushing owns an item, he can sell it with his own letter. If he consigns it to an auction house and they hire SCDA to authenticate, the item is disclosed via the check box on the back of our 2005 letter. <br /><br />Again, where is the loophole and lack of disclosure?<br /><br />
|
Ty Cobb/Bushing/SCDA/Game-Used Decal Bat
Posted By: <b>jay behrens</b><p>Troy, I hope you see the serious ethical problems with allowing your authenticators to buy, sell and issue their own LOAs outside of SCDA. Your authenticators need to be held to the absolute highest standard. This means that they have to have no appearance of impropriety or conflict of interest. <br /><br />Jay<br><br>Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty and well-preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming --- WOW, What a ride!
|
Ty Cobb/Bushing/SCDA/Game-Used Decal Bat
Posted By: <b>jay behrens</b><p>Troy, you don't think it's a problem that Bushing writes a LOA on an item, then MAstro decides to get SCDA to verify? Who at SCDA is going to dare say that something one of their authenticators isn't what it's claimed to be? It would professional suicide within the company to challenge Bushing or another top authenticator. <br /><br />If a case like this came up, I would hope SCDA would say thanks, but it would major conflict of intrest on our part to verify the claims of one of our employees. There should never be the need for a check box on the back of an LOA or any other such silliness.<br /><br />Your authenticators need to remove themselves from selling all together to remove any chance for the appearance of impropriety. I would think that you would want your company to be of the highest intregirity, and if Mr Bushing can't break away from selling stuff he authenticates, then you need to get rid of him as an authenticator because he cannot give you opinion on items that doesn't appear to be tainted.<br /><br />Jay<br /><br />Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty and well-preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming --- WOW, What a ride!
|
Ty Cobb/Bushing/SCDA/Game-Used Decal Bat
Posted By: <b>MW</b><p>If David Bushing is going to now reveal his ownership of all items he has consigned and perhaps authenticated himself then doesn't it stand to reason that he should also reveal how many (and which) previously consigned auction items fit into this same category?
|
Ty Cobb/Bushing/SCDA/Game-Used Decal Bat
Posted By: <b>Troy R. Kinunen</b><p>Dave has never had a problem disclosing what items he owns. If you have a question on a specific item, please ask. Now that a policy of addressing these items has been put in place, I suggest the following: <br /><br /><br />Would posting items on a website (and here) for all items SCDA authenticators own be a step in the right direction. We would be willing to state, For Auction House X, our authenticators have a finanical interest in the following lots: 1, 4, 56, 99, 105, 345. This would also be disclosed on the back of the LOAs as previously stated. If this board likes this idea, I will discuss with Dave about implementing it. <br /><br />Troy
|
Ty Cobb/Bushing/SCDA/Game-Used Decal Bat
Posted By: <b>jay behrens</b><p>It's a step in the right direction. As long as someone other than the authenticator has authenticated the item, there shouldn't be much problem. It's when the authenticator authenticates his own item, that is where problem lies. These people should never sell an item that they have authenticated. It just doesn't look good no matter what the circumstance may be. <br /><br />In an ideal world, your authenticators shouldn't be buying and selling items, period. Then you have no concerns about ethics and impropriety. It's your company to run, but I'd rahter save the headache of the appearance of impropriety then cowtow to the desires of your authenticators to buy and sell. Your authenticators should be just that, and not dealer/brokers on the side.<br /><br />Jay<br /><br />Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty and well-preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming --- WOW, What a ride!
|
Ty Cobb/Bushing/SCDA/Game-Used Decal Bat
Posted By: <b>davidcycleback</b><p>Some of my thoughts on LOAs.<br /><br />1) What matters by far the most is the accuracy of the letter. If the letter's description is accurate, all the other stuff is technicalities. If the letter is bad, then the other stuff may prove to be of more significance.<br /><br />2) While it doesn't bother me that the owner is writing the LOA, it would be a reasonable practice for letter writer to note that he is the owner. If that's the accepted rule, I think that's good. If SCDA discloses ownership and makes their disclosure rules clear, there you go.<br /><br />3) Ownership does not prevent an LOA from being good. I recently bought a photograph from a famous photographer that he literally printed for me, signed and dated upon my request (not because he thought I'm a swell guy, but because I paid him $$). If some person down the road wanted to buy it from me and asked me to write an LOA with said story, am I to say, "Sorry. It would be considered unethical if I wrote that down on paper"?<br /><br />4) Some may consider it desirable if an auction lot was owned and consigned by a well known figure. I'm sure many bat collectors would find it desirable the a bat came from Dave Bushing's personal collection. The irony is that, in cases, an auction house's disclosure that a bat was being consigned by Bushing may raise interest.<br /><br />5) I forgot what I was going to say here but, as I recall, it was brilliant yet quite mad. <br /><br />6) My pet peave about the baseball memorabilia hobby is some institutions inability to communicate with the normal collectors about things the collectors should know about. If SCDA (I'm guessing at the acronym here) puts in new rules to disclose more to collectors, that's a good thing in my mind. It seems to me that Troy posting here is a good sign too, as far as communication goes.<br /><br />7) I'm sick of baseball bats. Take this over to the bat forum.<br /><br />
|
Ty Cobb/Bushing/SCDA/Game-Used Decal Bat
Posted By: <b>jay behrens</b><p>David, a very valid point about owner's writing LOAs. The difference in your scenario is that there isn't any other way to really do that LOA. In the case of something like the DiMaggio bat, the authenticator has everything to gain from saying it's a streak bat, but he is not the only person capable of making this determination.<br /><br />Jay<br><br>Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty and well-preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming --- WOW, What a ride!
|
Ty Cobb/Bushing/SCDA/Game-Used Decal Bat
Posted By: <b>J Levine</b><p>I personally do not collect game-used or autographs for the reasons listed above but one thing does trouble me a little. A lot of collectors are slamming Bushing, et.al. (and in my opinion rightfully so) for doing what many of us do practically everyday...I have bought items (read as vintage cards) and authenticated them myself, and then sold them on ebay giving them my personal guarantee of authenticity and originality. Not once asking for a second opinion, confident in the knowledge that I have acquired over the years (just as I am sure Bushing et. al. think). I think that Bushing and some of the other game used authenticators have crossed an ethical line by non-disclosure of ownership and instead of just admitting mistakes and trying to correct them they have tried to cover their collectives butts. <br /><br />I have been at shows many times and helped tell friends and dealers about cards and letting them know if they were reprits, fakes, or orginals. Do I consider myself the foremost authenticator of Phillies or T-205 cards? Of course not! I always tell the people that I give information to that it is my opinion. Heck, some of you even saw me run around to about six dealers incl. Mastro, fellow board members Art M. and David L., and another collector that I respect when I was asked if a t-205 blank back was real. Consensus was it was real (and it was nice) and I ended up buying it from the dealer who asked me to look at it...Now, I have authenticated it to my satisfaction and if I decide to sell it, many of you would buy it on spec. from me just because I have a small reputaion of being an "expert" on T-205s. No LOA, no COA, no third party grader. Just me. Just like Bushing. The difference is that you know I own it and I back my product. Bushing hides behind the authentication and the company he consigned the item to. I think that is the unethical part. <br /><br />The point of all this is, I have no problem with demanding more than one authentication and asking questions, but remember that people in glass houses should not throw stones and no one is perfect. I have made mistakes, admitted them, refunded money, etc. It is not that hard to do. I wish people would just admit their mistakes, stop suing each other, and get on with collecting...<br /><br />I feel that people should ask questions and I encourage it but just be aware next time you sell on ebay an ungraded/unauthenticated item that you may be doing the same thing as Bushing.<br /><br />I will end this tired tirade now...<br /><br />Joshua
|
Ty Cobb/Bushing/SCDA/Game-Used Decal Bat
Posted By: <b>jay behrens</b><p>Joshua, good point. But there is a huge difference between us "authenticating" cards and Bushing, et al authetincating bats, etc, especially when making claims as to a particular item being used at a particular time. There's a huge difference in price between a DiMaggio gamer and one used during The Streak. You just don't look at a bat, look it over and say this is a Streak bat. And we all know money will make people do stupid or unethical things.<br /><br />Jay<br><br>Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty and well-preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming --- WOW, What a ride!
|
Ty Cobb/Bushing/SCDA/Game-Used Decal Bat
Posted By: <b>Joe P.</b><p>Build Me a Horse!<br /><br />A LARGE Horse.<br /><br />And I will get you all the Authentic bats, gloves, balls and uniforms to passeth on to our Lemmings.<br /><br />About the Lemmings Troy, have you noticed the numbers dropping off a bit lately?
|
Ty Cobb/Bushing/SCDA/Game-Used Decal Bat
Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>Troy, here's a very simple way to end this controversy (and more importantly, convince yourself that going forward you'll be able to make as much money as before Bushing's dishonest business practice was revealed): <br /><br />All Bushing-authenticated memorabilia should be able to be returned for the price paid.<br /><br />That's only fair, right? If you all are truly concerned about transparency going forward, it is only fair that consumers be given this chance.<br /><br />Now I recognize that this may cost more than flying 5 guys from this board to Chicago, but fair is fair.
|
Ty Cobb/Bushing/SCDA/Game-Used Decal Bat
Posted By: <b>PASJD</b><p>Instead of the new disclosure policy with all the fine print, why don't the major auction houses simply decline to sell items in which their authenticators have a financial interest? How hard is that? If the authenticators want to sell items from their personal collections, fine, let them do it on ebay under their own names, and let their LOA's reflect the fact of the direct sale so that future purchasers are not deceived. While fuller disclosure is commendable, it seems to me it still does not avoid the appearance of impropriety and incestuous relationships. There are some things that even disclosure does not cure and are best avoided in the first instance. Is the problem that too large a percentage of the memorabilia out there is in fact owned by the authenticators themselves?
|
Ty Cobb/Bushing/SCDA/Game-Used Decal Bat
Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>Take a look at the stuff Bushing is selling on ebay. He sells stuff which he claims to be 'game used' (even though a Dale Murphy bat is described as having 'no real game wear.') What a laugher! He'll continue to work his money printing press (oops, I mean provide his LOA) and the suckers keep coming! Dave, I'm sure it felt good to watch that Dimag bat sell ... but do you have any integrity at all?
|
Ty Cobb/Bushing/SCDA/Game-Used Decal Bat
Posted By: <b>warshawlaw</b><p>But I have no interest in going to Wisconsin in the dead of winter to review materials that I will obtain via subpoena or otherwise shortly. Since SCDA has no problem making these materials available to several collectors free of charge, Instead of my attending, I would request that SCDA make the materials available to a bonded copy service representative I will ask to attend the meeting. <br /><br />Meanwhile, in regard to the conflict of interests issue, Troy, I think you are missing the point: Jim Beckett sold out his interest in his card shop when it became apparent that if he continued to buy and sell cards his price guides would always be suspected of being vehicles to pump his inventory. The same is true for authenticators who sell their own stuff. As long as Mr. Bushing is a dealer and an authenticator, he will be suspected of using his authenticator's position for personal gain, whether it is directly pimping things he owns as was the case with the DiMaggio bat or benefitting his items by underrating comparable items so that the value of his "better" inventory surges. You see how insidious it is? <br /><br />
|
Ty Cobb/Bushing/SCDA/Game-Used Decal Bat
Posted By: <b>PASJD</b><p>Of course they get the point. They choose not to act on it, because the same people doing the authenticating apparently also own what may well be a signficant percentage of the memorabilia in the marketplace. Perhaps that is inevitable, as there may not be enough money in "just" authenticating to earn a living (as there is in cards due to volume). So what you will see are some incremental, fine print disclosures, and perhaps that is the best one can hope for. It's better than one can hope for on the card front; I SERIOUSLY doubt (although I hope I am wrong) that Mastro is going to fully disclose from now on the extent to which each card in his auctions has "received services from" (I am loathe to use the loaded "restored" word) his "outside conservator."
|
Ty Cobb/Bushing/SCDA/Game-Used Decal Bat
Posted By: <b>Jerry Ficchi</b><p>Last year I purchased a DiMaggio used coach’s bat from a Slater’s Auction which came with a Bushing/Knoll letter of authenticity. The letter states the bat is 35 inches. At the last Fort Washington show, I brought the bat to Troy and Dave and paid SCDA in order to receive a better/prettier/more comprehensive letter. When I received said letter, much to my surprise, the bat had miraculously turned into a 34.5-inch "team" bat as DiMaggio had never ordered that size. <br /><br />My question is, did Bushing consign this "Coach’s" bat to Slater, stating its 35-inch length in order to sell it, then, when faced with reauthenticating the same bat, reveal its true colors? Granted, it’s far from a $100k+ bat, but to me it makes a difference. This is simply another example of the shenanigans that go on in this "hobby". As a matter of fact, when reading his signed Slater’s letter of authenticity, Bushing joked that he should bring it to Jimmy Spence to authenticate his own signature.<br />
|
Ty Cobb/Bushing/SCDA/Game-Used Decal Bat
Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>Ahh...Bushing and SCDA...what a perfect team! It's like a tag-team match in professional wrestling. Now if only you had asked Bushing if the bat was a real Dimiggio used coach's bat instead of simply accepting his word, you might have been steered in the right direction. Your bad!
|
Ty Cobb/Bushing/SCDA/Game-Used Decal Bat
Posted By: <b>Billy</b><p>"But I have no interest in going to Wisconsin in the dead of winter to review materials that I will obtain via subpoena or otherwise shortly."<br /><br />I died laughing when I saw that, thanks warshawlaw.
|
Ty Cobb/Bushing/SCDA/Game-Used Decal Bat
Posted By: <b>davidcycleback</b><p>On an interesting side note, I knew a guy who got a job working for the Beckett baseball price guide. Part of his job was gathering prices from dealers and such, calculating prices and such. He was just a regular worker and no big wig. He told me that Beckett forbade him buying and selling baseball cards, at least on a regular basis. I don't think it was against house rules to buy a Mickey Mantle for his nephew's birthday or perhaps even for himself once in a while, but he couldn't deal. When he got the job, he sold of a lot of his collection because he knew he couldn't sell them while working there. He did keep a few cards as part of his personal collection.
|
Ty Cobb/Bushing/SCDA/Game-Used Decal Bat
Posted By: <b>mcavoy</b><p>I believe a difference is evident when a certificate is issued by SCDA versus Mr. Bushing (or anyone else). SCDA, presumably, wants a viable business and high reputation yesterday, today and in the future, so the corporation retains value. Coin World holding company owns ANACS, and authenticator and grader of coins, so publishers in the collectibles businesses seem to spread their fingers into many pies. But the second any doubt about the qualifications of Mr. Bushing, any SCDA certificate signed by him is suspect. I think SCDA would want to rethink permitting Mr. Bushing from selling his items with his certificate, since his potential poor reputation could bring potential suspicion to SCDA certificates bearing his signature.<br /><br />As a side note, in my view, this much different than me providing my certificate with the items I sell. If the items I sell come under suspicion and I fail to make right, I risk a poor reputation - no one else does. I am not a third party. SCDA is a 3rd party, and they create value from their opinions. When Mr. Bushing issues certificates on items he has a financial stake in, he is not a 3rd party, and SCDA is indirectly no longer a 3rd party.
|
Ty Cobb/Bushing/SCDA/Game-Used Decal Bat
Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>Interesting. An enitre day has passed after I made a suggestion that all SCDA/Bushing authenticated materials be permitted to be returned for a refund. Troy, I can hear the crickets chirping.....
|
Ty Cobb/Bushing/SCDA/Game-Used Decal Bat
Posted By: <b>PASJD</b><p>I am curious, do the Grey Flannel bat authentication guys (Malta and Taube) also sell their own bats through the major auction houses or do they subscribe to different rules than Mr. Bushing?
|
Ty Cobb/Bushing/SCDA/Game-Used Decal Bat
Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>Interesting question. I'll call them tomorrow and find out. Could it be possible that they have Bushing's Disease also?
|
Ty Cobb/Bushing/SCDA/Game-Used Decal Bat
Posted By: <b>Anonymous</b><p> <br /> fuzzysloth doesn't the second letter mean the 1st letter was a fraud??? why don't you ask for your money back based on the 2nd letter?? isn't that what a LOA is?, a guarentee that which you purchase is REAL(as in the LOA) or does the LOA from bushing not carry any guarentee?i'm confused?
|
Ty Cobb/Bushing/SCDA/Game-Used Decal Bat
Posted By: <b>Jerry Ficchi</b><p>Unfortunately, Slaters Auctions was purchased by Heritage Auctions and they won’t honor previous letters.
|
Ty Cobb/Bushing/SCDA/Game-Used Decal Bat
Posted By: <b>J Levine</b><p>Adam could probably let you know better than I but if Heritage bought the other auction house, don't they take on the liability as well...depending on the contract of the sale, they may have to honor the other's letters, debts, guarentees, etc.<br /><br />-Joshua
|
Ty Cobb/Bushing/SCDA/Game-Used Decal Bat
Posted By: <b>leon</b><p>I am no business acquisition expert but do know that the way a company is bought has a lot to do with what the past liabilites will be. If a company buys the stock of another, instead of just the assets, then they are probably liable. I know when I bought some companies last year I only bought the assets, not the stock, so was not liable for the other company's liabilities. It might change with what state you're in too. So in answer to your question it's hard to say if they bought the liablities without knowing the way the deal was structured.....best regards
|
Ty Cobb/Bushing/SCDA/Game-Used Decal Bat
Posted By: <b>Joe P.</b><p>All past liabilities be Stabilized!<br />And they were stabilized.<br /><br />However, I don't recall getting an LOA?
|
Ty Cobb/Bushing/SCDA/Game-Used Decal Bat
Posted By: <b>Anonymous</b><p>Interestingly enough, page 6 of the latest SCD - The Inside Pitch column, "Authenticating the Authenticators."
|
Ty Cobb/Bushing/SCDA/Game-Used Decal Bat
Posted By: <b>davidcycleback</b><p>It would take a flaming dumb ass to accept a $15 examination fee so he could accept total financial liability for a $50,000 piece of memorabilia.<br /><br />A collector should ask an expert for his learned and objective opinion. And if a learned and objective opinion from an expert is not good enough for a collector, that's the collector's problem.
|
Ty Cobb/Bushing/SCDA/Game-Used Decal Bat
Posted By: <b>Joe P.</b><p>Bushing?<br />You?
|
Over 13 years ago since the last post of this thread. What ever came of all this?
|
When the centerbrand says “Made By” instead of the players initials (TC, in this instance), it is a Professional Model Bat. The initials within the centerbrand would indicate a store model Bat. The professional models were typically Hand turned and featured better wood, finer grain, etc.
Here’s an example that recently closed with authentication from Taube and Mears... http://sports.mearsonlineauctions.co...LOT122182.aspx |
Joe P. is missed.
|
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:46 PM. |